United States First Circuit

In an action brought by a putative intervenor, concerning an injunction issued in a bitter dispute between victims of terrorist violence and governmental entities in the Palestinian territories, claiming that the injunction, which does not refer to it by name, has frozen its assets, the district court's rejection of the claim and denial of the motion to intervene are both affirmed where the putative intervenor has failed to demonstrate that it has a sufficient interest in the underlying action to justify intervention as of right.

Appellate Information

• Decided 02/09/2011
• Published 02/11/2011

Judges

• SELYA

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel